Are they setting up a flaw in Dany's right to the IT?

31 posts in this topic

This is just another example of dumb deviations from the source material. HBO doesn't care about plot logic.

Look, if Jon can deny Dany's right to rule because it's based on her ancestor's claim, then Dany can just as easily deny Jon's claims. Dany can deny Jon's identity. Besides, polygamy is not legal, so even if Rhaegar married Lyanna, Jon is still a bastard. If I were Dany, I would refuse to recognize Jon's claims.

Well, I think we agree.. I hope they won't just say Jon is son of Rhaegar and conclude that his claim is stronger than Dany's..

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Line of succession goes through Rhaegar no matter what. It doesn't matter if he dies before Aerys. If he dies before Aerys, then when Aerys kicks the bucket, Rhaegar's eldest son is next in line. Viserys would've only been next after Rhaegar if Rhaegar had had no children. But once Rhaegar had a son, the claims of his sons would trump those of Viserys. In other words...

Aerys --> Rhaegar --> Aegon --> Jon --> Viserys

The only part I'm hazy about is where Rhaegar's daughter would fit. I suspect that, being a girl, she'd get pushed to the back of the line of succession after all the potential male heirs, putting her right behind Viserys and before Daenerys.

It does matter. Again, as stated above Aerys names Viserys his heir after Rhaegar died. Kings are allowed to choose their heirs. I ask again do people think George just put this fact out there, that Aerys named Viserys his heir, just for shits and giggles?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The thing is that a bastard has no right on his father heritage.. So if Jon is a bastard:

Aerys-->Rhaegar-->Aegon-->Viserys-->Daenerys

If Rhaegar married Lyanna there is still doubt about Jon's claim, since many (including Dorne possibly) will claim that the second marriage is not valid.

But even if we skip that part who can support Jon's claim to the throne?

Who can say that he is Rhaegar's son?

And who can say that Rhaegar married Lyanna?

Bran Stark is a greenseer..he knows the truth. Jon has dark hair, dark eyes. His claim depends on the word of a cripple "skinchanger-freak".(my fav character is Bran)

On the other hand, nobody can deny that Daenerys is a Targaryen.

If Jon was Aegon nobody would deny he is the son of Rhaegar.. He looks Valyrian and his is a trueborn son..

1) You're assuming that Jon is a bastard. The great likelihood is that he's not. And polygamy was legal for Targaryens. Point to an instance of a Targaryen born from a polygamous marriage who was treated as a bastard. You won't find any, because they're not bastards.

2) A plot point that major would of course have to include a development which leads Jon's birthright unable to be contested, otherwise it's the same as a fart in the wind. It'd be like introducing Chekov's Gun in the First Act just to find that it only shoots blanks. Not to mention that there are likely numerous sources of evidence which have been hinted at and which will likely come to the fore when the time is right. So the idea that there won't be convincing evidence which will convince people that he is Rhaegar's son is, frankly, ludicrous. Not even the worst hack writers in the world would lay the groundwork for such a massive bomb to be dropped in their narrative only for it to have zero impact.

3) Who would support Jon? The North, the Vale of Arryn, and the Riverlands. That's nearly half the Seven Kingdoms and over half the Seven Kingdoms in terms of landmass, with one of those kingdoms basically untouched by all the wars. And if Jon is a dragon rider and Rhaegal is for him, then Jon would have a dragon, too (With Viserion being taken by the Night King). Daenerys is currently unbeatable because she has three dragons. Take away two dragons and put them on opposing sides and she's very much beatable.

Edited August 6, 2017 by Thor Odinson

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1) You're assuming that Jon is a bastard. The great likelihood is that he's not. And polygamy was legal for Targaryens. Point to an instance of a Targaryen born from a polygamous marriage who was treated as a bastard. You won't find any, because they're not bastards.

2) A plot point that major would of course have to include a development which leads Jon's birthright unable to be contested, otherwise it's the same as a fart in the wind. It'd be like introducing Chekov's Gun in the First Act just to find that it only shoots blanks. Not to mention that there are likely numerous sources of evidence which have been hinted at and which will likely come to the fore when the time is right. So the idea that there won't be convincing evidence which will convince people that he is Rhaegar's son is, frankly, ludicrous. Not even the worst hack writers in the world would lay the groundwork for such a massive bomb to be dropped in their narrative only for it to have zero impact.

3) Who would support Jon? The North, the Vale of Arryn, and the Riverlands. That's nearly half the Seven Kingdoms and over half the Seven Kingdoms in terms of landmass, with one of those kingdoms basically untouched by all the wars. And if Jon is a dragon rider and Rhaegal is for him, then Jon would have a dragon, too (With Viserion being taken by the Night King). Daenerys is currently unbeatable because she has three dragons. Take away two dragons and put them on opposing sides and she's very much beatable.

1) Polygamy led to a great conflict between the Targaryens and the Faith. I dont understand what do you mean with the word legal.. According to whose laws. Maegor the Cruel was the Last Targaryen who was a part of polygamy... So I dont think there are many example of it in the Targeryen dynasty...

2)Explain me who will show proof for Jon's parentage when Dany will question his claim..

3)I talked about Jon being supported by the North and the Vale in another post... My point is that Jon being supported by the Northeners is nonsense.. He lead them to a war against Ramsay that they couldnt win. If Sansa didnt asked for Littlefinger's help, he and his men would be slaughtered... Robin Arryn supporting his claim is possible because their leader is a sick boy, but if Robbin was someone who seek for power he would declare himself King in the North and the Vale since he conquered two of the stronger strongholds in the North.
I really dont understand why you suggest that Riverlands would support his claim. Sansa Stark is a Tully.. yes. But Jon "Stark" is believed to be the bastard of Ned.. A shame to Catelyn, a shame to house Tully. And the only living Tully is Edmure and i really dont know what happened to her after the Frey feast..

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1) You're assuming that Jon is a bastard. The great likelihood is that he's not. And polygamy was legal for Targaryens. Point to an instance of a Targaryen born from a polygamous marriage who was treated as a bastard. You won't find any, because they're not bastards.

2) A plot point that major would of course have to include a development which leads Jon's birthright unable to be contested, otherwise it's the same as a fart in the wind. It'd be like introducing Chekov's Gun in the First Act just to find that it only shoots blanks. Not to mention that there are likely numerous sources of evidence which have been hinted at and which will likely come to the fore when the time is right. So the idea that there won't be convincing evidence which will convince people that he is Rhaegar's son is, frankly, ludicrous. Not even the worst hack writers in the world would lay the groundwork for such a massive bomb to be dropped in their narrative only for it to have zero impact.

3) Who would support Jon? The North, the Vale of Arryn, and the Riverlands. That's nearly half the Seven Kingdoms and over half the Seven Kingdoms in terms of landmass, with one of those kingdoms basically untouched by all the wars. And if Jon is a dragon rider and Rhaegal is for him, then Jon would have a dragon, too (With Viserion being taken by the Night King). Daenerys is currently unbeatable because she has three dragons. Take away two dragons and put them on opposing sides and she's very much beatable.

1. i am pretty sure that both of his parents were married. why else would he have guards at the tower of joy.

2. most likely jon will be a dragon rider.

3. i hope that they work together, but its unlikely right now.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

No sure if Jon has a "better" claim. Danny is Daughter of the Mad King. Jon is his Grandson. So on terms of Generations, Danny has a better claim. I understand that Jon is a Man and Westeros society is more patriarcal. However, there were cases of women sitting in the IT. So If Jon's claims is "better" I don't think is far than absolute.

Added: If Rhaegar had died AFTER the Mad King, (which wasn't the case), than Jon's claim would be indisputable because Rhaegar would be the King.

sorry, but jon has a better claim because he is male. i dont think he will take the throne so it didnt matter.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1) Polygamy led to a great conflict between the Targaryens and the Faith. I dont understand what do you mean with the word legal.. According to whose laws. Maegor the Cruel was the Last Targaryen who was a part of polygamy... So I dont think there are many example of it in the Targeryen dynasty...

Targaryens are the ones who make the laws. If they say polygamy is legal for them, then it's legal for them. Again, find me an instance in which a Targaryen, born from a polygamous marriage, was treated as a bastard. You're claiming they'd be treated as a bastard, so find me an example of where that happened.

Not to mention that I heard a rumor that Rhaegar had his marriage to Elia set aside. So if that happened, then we wouldn't even be talking about a polygamous marriage, as Lyanna would be his only wife.

2)Explain me who will show proof for Jon's parentage when Dany will question his claim..

There could be any number of sources: witnesses, official marriage documents, items buried in Lyanna's tomb, etc. Not to mention that if Jon becomes a dragon rider, that itself would be pretty conclusive.

3)I talked about Jon being supported by the North and the Vale in another post... My point is that Jon being supported by the Northeners is nonsense.. He lead them to a war against Ramsay that they couldnt win.

What you just said is nonsense. He didn't lead the North. He led two thousand Wildlings and a couple dozen men from Bear Island. He did NOT have the power of the North behind him at the Battle of the Bastards. Did you miss all the episodes prior to that SHOWING HIM going to meet Northern lords and those lords telling him flatly no? Did you miss the part in the finale when Robett Glover stood up and showed remorse for NOT fighting with him at the Battle of the Bastards? Did you miss the part in the season premiere where Jon installed two new lords for House Karstark and House Umber, the two houses which fought against him, and so clearly weren't fighting for him? Where in the world do you get the idea that the North had been fighting for Jon in that battle?

I really dont understand why you suggest that Riverlands would support his claim. Sansa Stark is a Tully.. yes. But Jon "Stark" is believed to be the bastard of Ned.. A shame to Catelyn, a shame to house Tully. And the only living Tully is Edmure and i really dont know what happened to her after the Frey feast..

Because Sansa would ask and because the Riverlands have already sided with the Starks. Do you really think they'd side with Daenerys AGAINST their last living blood relatives? That they'd help Daenerys or anyone else kill Sansa, Arya, or Bran, Edmure's nephew and nieces? What are the words of House Tully, again? "Family, Duty, Honor." Edmure's family is in Winterfell. His duty was to the King in the North, who he swore allegiance to. His honor would compel him to repay the debt he owes Arya, for killing the Freys and freeing the Riverlands.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

sorry, but jon has a better claim because he is male. i dont think he will take the throne so it didnt matter.

Yep. Once Rhaegar had a son, the line of succession went through him. It didn't matter what happened to Rhaegar at that point, because next in line after Aerys would have been his son, Aegon. Had Rhaegar NOT had any children, then yes, succession would've passed to Viserys after Rhaegar died, but Rhaegar had kids. That's how succession works: it goes through the first male child, and it goes to the first male child of THAT male child, before it passes to siblings or uncles.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Yep. Once Rhaegar had a son, the line of succession went through him. It didn't matter what happened to Rhaegar at that point, because next in line after Aerys would have been his son, Aegon. Had Rhaegar NOT had any children, then yes, succession would've passed to Viserys after Rhaegar died, but Rhaegar had kids. That's how succession works: it goes through the first male child, and it goes to the first male child of THAT male child, before it passes to siblings or uncles.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Think of it this way... if Prince Charles died before he was king, what would happen? Prince William would be the Queen's heir, not Princess Anne (per new UK laws on inheritance post-Prince George's birth). It would continue too all Prince Charles' heirs (children, grandchildren, etc.) before it would go to his sister. So, if Jon is legitimate, as Rhaegar's surviving child, it would go to him and his heirs before going to Viserys and his heirs (not applicable) and then Dany.